Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.
Thanks for sharing this video. While it is a bit long and has some duplication about some games in the introduction part and the specific game parts, it was nonetheless interesting to hear about this in depth talk about the romance genre.
I think the biggest problem romance in games will always have is the inherent contradiction between game mechanics and the realistic development of a relationship. It will be between the two extremes of being a pre written story or being a “relationship vending machine”. But maybe somebody will find a way to combine both in the future. I never would have guessed that I found it fascinating to play a autocratic countries border guard and then along come Papers, Please, so who knows.
I don’t really understand the downvotes, is it due to the length or directly proving the point of the video that too many people are scared of romance in games?
I think an important step would be to not be afraid of creating characters with actual… well, character. It was somewhat mentioned in the video but it seems like devs are unwilling to make NPCs with their own likes and dislikes, ones that might disagree with players instead of being all over them no matter what. This might be a slight exaggeration but boy do I wish we had more “real” feeling NPCs in games. I’m sure I’m not the only one who couldn’t care less about being the most important being in the universe and would rather be treated as an equal part of the world.
From a mechanical standpoint, relationship system in Scarlet Hollow feels like a good step into making interactions more natural (here is a detailed look by one of the devs) but I realize it’s a lot of work for something a good chunk of players won’t care about. I understand why this isn’t something many (especially bigger) devs would be interested in using but it’s still a disappointment.
Maybe AI will be able to help somewhat with this problem in the future but I’m not going to hold my breath on that.
Thanks for sharing this video. While it is a bit long and has some duplication about some games in the introduction part and the specific game parts, it was nonetheless interesting to hear about this in depth talk about the romance genre.
I think the biggest problem romance in games will always have is the inherent contradiction between game mechanics and the realistic development of a relationship. It will be between the two extremes of being a pre written story or being a “relationship vending machine”. But maybe somebody will find a way to combine both in the future. I never would have guessed that I found it fascinating to play a autocratic countries border guard and then along come Papers, Please, so who knows.
I don’t really understand the downvotes, is it due to the length or directly proving the point of the video that too many people are scared of romance in games?
I think an important step would be to not be afraid of creating characters with actual… well, character. It was somewhat mentioned in the video but it seems like devs are unwilling to make NPCs with their own likes and dislikes, ones that might disagree with players instead of being all over them no matter what. This might be a slight exaggeration but boy do I wish we had more “real” feeling NPCs in games. I’m sure I’m not the only one who couldn’t care less about being the most important being in the universe and would rather be treated as an equal part of the world.
From a mechanical standpoint, relationship system in Scarlet Hollow feels like a good step into making interactions more natural (here is a detailed look by one of the devs) but I realize it’s a lot of work for something a good chunk of players won’t care about. I understand why this isn’t something many (especially bigger) devs would be interested in using but it’s still a disappointment.
Maybe AI will be able to help somewhat with this problem in the future but I’m not going to hold my breath on that.